Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 196 F.1d 627 - Roseboom v. Corbitt

Roseboom v. Corbitt’s Empirical Analysis

196 F. 627 · 1912

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
January 1938
most recently cited

4 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1938

4 federal appellate ·

20191219201930decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Grymes v. Sanders · Shappirio v. Goldberg · Robb v. Vos · McLean v. Clapp · Atlantic Delaine Co. v. James

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““When a purchaser acquires knowledge that he has been defrauded, he hag an election of legal remedies. lie may keep the property and sue for damages, or repudiate the contract and demand rescission. These remedies are not concurrent, but inconsistent, and the adoption of one of necessity excludes the other. The rule is well settled in equity that after knowledge of the fraud the party must, within reasonable time, make an election as to whether he will affirm the 'trade, notwithstanding the fraud, or offer to restore the property and demand the return of his purchase money. If, after the knowledge of the facts which entitle him to rescind, he deal with the property as owner, it is evidence of acquiescence and an affirmance of the contract. The authorities to this point are numerous, and the principle well settled.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.